Almost. They claim, though, that you get essentially all the benefit for the first child. A second child is a step back (although still ahead of a childess couple).
As I mention above, the whole analysis depends on the relationship between dollars spent and cost of living being pretty much the same for a child as for an adult. I don't know if that's true. Guest doesn't seem to think so.
They're not looking at changes to the need for spending at all--they're just claiming that there's more money per person to spend: The child is living better (in the sense that more dollars per year are being spent on him or her) than a single person grossing $10,000 a year--even a bit better than a couple grossing $20,000 a year.
Perhaps it would be illegal, immoral, or even impossible to raise a child on that amount of money. I don't have any kids, so I simply don't have the data to express an opinion. I'm just reporting on what the book said.
Wilson commented that Amazon often "prepares to ship" immediately.
In that case how can you get back to "your account" quickly enough to cancel the order?
The last thing I want is to be stuck with a book on biology and be out of pocket to the tune of $100.
Even though you say you can refuse delivery from UPS I'd still be down by $100 until Amazon passes the credit which could be one or two weeks later.
I've also never been a Prime Member or used a Prime trial so I'm a bit wary on the one hand but want the 3-mth free shipping on the other!
Any thoughts about this?
I'm also a bit puzzled Carrie.
If you refused the diaper package why did you have to contact UPS at all? Didn't the UPS person take it back straight away?
Also why the need to spend $100? Why not $50 or $30?
Income money declining, lack of jobs, lack of sales, with less work around more people will be in this situation soon. So many will be in trouble and it is not from signing into a mortage they could not afford. It is our economy that will make it so you will not be able to meet your mortgage or RENT obligations.
Is this really much different than those who took advantage of the U.S. bankruptcy system before its reform? I can't tell you how many times I've heard that people would buy whatever they wanted (whether they could afford it or not) and just file bankruptcy later. Who ended up paying for their spending? The rest of us. But that doesn't mean I'll ever just stop paying my bills.
Karma, good stewardship, whatever you want to call it, being shortsighted on this won't do you any good in the long run. Keep your head up, run a fair race, and you will be rewarded. Maybe not in interest rates or cash, but in knowing that you paid your debt and kept your honor and credit in tact. These things will all shake out in the end. We have to believe this, or our country is a sad place, indeed. (Besides, what are we teaching our kids if we just roll over and give it up?)
You guys in the States are so lucky to have all these coupons and coupon websites. Here in New Zealand, we just don't get as much of that going on. Ah well, I'll save money in other ways :-)
The article is spot on except for the part about the guy who lost his job. When you commit to a mortgage you should know there will be bumps along the 30 year road. Government has no business helping you. That's what friends and family are for! House prices going up or down shouldn't stop you from making payments - you made an agreement - follow through! Stop the effin bailout bs!
Screw the 'struggling' homeowners. Bail out your own sorry asses. I don't want to pay for your mistakes, miscalculations or even your SUV's.
Predatory lending, yes, there was that, but what happened to filling out documents honestly and reading what you sign?
What's happening today will lead to a new American Revolution. Or, maybe a new American Revolution, one that will shatter this nation. There are no modern Abraham Lincolns around.
The coupon preview option sounds interesting. We've only got until the end of today, huh? I was just about to start dinner, but I think I'll jump on this first.
I haven't fully read the article yet, but I've bookmarked it :) I have a bag of dried lentils at home that I should really use, and I'm sure this article will help me figure something out.
"Sorry, I find most of these places are just an invitation to overeat mediocre, extremely unhealthy food just because it's "all you can eat!" "
For the most part, I agree with you. My SO is "not allowed" (his words) to go to Chinese buffets anymore because he overeats and feels sick afterwards.
That said, there's an Indian restaurant near me that serves proper sit-down dinners and a lunch buffet. I mean, there's still a chance of overeating, but it is good food, and somewhat healthier than the Americanized Chinese food you get at most buffets (oh, and much friendlier to vegetarians!). Also the only time I ever go is with my coworkers, and we walk the two and a half miles there and back, so it works out ;)
So they're claiming that it costs LESS than $1693/year (about $141.00/month) out of pocket (the difference in the income figures) to raise a child? On what planet is that the case?
food, clothing, healthcare, childcare, higher insurance premiums-- ALL of it for under $141 a month?!?!?
I might help to have a coupon strategy to save yourself the most cash. If you choose say a half hour every friday clipping coupons, depending on you grocery bill, could save maybe 40 percent. I even overheard once from the "Coupon Mom", that you could do good by buying 2 or 3 newspapers. Now I've heard some whoppers, but I'll let everyone else be the judge.
I would encourage anyone, before they make any rash decisions, to become more informed about their options. First, read all your can about the current bill (from the dot govs themslves). Second, don't forget about the HopeNow program, and other like it, that help struggling homeowners.
This reminds me of the book Cheaper by the Dozen. The more children you have, the lower the CPC (cost per child) is, since they all live in the same house, share the same resources etc. :-)
Loved the article. A lot of people are thinking this way. I too have a good fixed rate on a 30 year loan from when I purchased a very modest home at the end of 2002. This idea sounds great on paper, but so does communism. The reality is the plan will be a lot harder to "live". I wish those who choose to do this a lot luck. Good luck sleeping at night and good luck with Uncle Sam taking care of you. It has been my experience when Uncle Sam takes care of you, it normally does not go so well and certainly not very smoothly...think red tape, long lines, being placed on hold and being screwed over. One way or another the more goverment in your life, the more headaches you will have. When has the government ever run anything well or smoothly? It is actually probably less stressful just to work hard and pay your bills. In the end, what goes around comes around. And if not, at least I can sleep at night. All the money in the world is no good if you cannot sleep at night and be at peace. So fellow payors of other other people's irresponsibility, I say....Sleep Well my friends, Sleep well!
Renting is often better when considering where to personally live, but this should not be taken to exclude real estate from a well diversified portfolio. There are different types of real estate bets to make, many of which are superior to a single family residence.
When it comes to deciding whether to rent or own for yourself I defer to these two articles written on the decision:
When considering real estate as an investment (not place to live), apply basic discounted cash flow valuation methodologies and make sure risk-adjusted expected returns are greater than required returns for the risk level of the asset class...for real estate ~ 14% before tax RROR. Since real estate markets are illiquid and very much imefficient, there are many chances to negotiate deals that meet required return hurdle rates.
We did the responsible thing too. We put down 20% on a modest home and got a fixed rate, 30-year mortgage. It ticks me off to no end that the speculators, real estate flippers, and the instant gratification, no-money-down crowd are getting bailed out. Sure, there's blame enough to go around to include the dishonest people who wrote out these irresponsible loans, but as you say, no one put a gun to anyone's head and made them take out a loan they couldn't afford.
It makes me sick. I'm going to keep paying my mortgage, along with the extra principle payments. Sure, it'd be nice to not have to pay off the rest of the mortgage, but we got where we are by doing the responsible, cautious, plodding thing. I'd rather *know* I paid off our debt fair and square, so that no one can touch us, than gamble on getting something for nothing.
I haven't done the calculations myself; I'm just reporting on what Kotlikoff and Burns had to say. They describe a poor couple, each making $10,000 a year, living in New Bedford, Massachusetts. (They quote the Lizzie Borden poem.) Here's what they have to say:
The birth of a child, notwithstanding an extra mouth to feed, would actually raise their individual living standard from $6,571 to $8,264 each. That's a 26 percent increase!
What's the difference? Once little Lucky shows up, Lou and Lucy get a $3,416 federal income tax refund and pay only $21 in Massachusetts state income taxes rather than the $360 and $283 they had been paying. In addition, they get food stamps worth $4,400.
There is no possible way you can save money by having children. They will ALWAYS be more expensive than any tax breaks you may receive. Have you looked at health care coverage lately? My state requires 3 vaccinations this year for my 18 month old child, and insurance covers ONE. I end up paying $185 each for the other two completely out of my pocket.
That's one tiny example, but you get my drift. It will never be a financial benefit to have children.
Aside from that, shouldn't there be other reasons for having children other than to save a buck or two? What happens when you realize you are losing money on the child?
Sears has a pretty good return policy, so I wouldn't exactly call it tossing dollar bills out the window-- though I do find their quality to be low on many things.
They have a correspondingly good mens' sale.
Great tip on the LNT sale, I've been wanting to get a second set of my favorite sheets from there and waiting for the price to drop.
This is an old story that sums up the only option that we have to help our children. Of course it involves our own personal sacrifice.
Call the farmer John Galt.
HERE was once a farmer who suffered much at the hands of a money-lender. Good harvests, or bad, the farmer was always poor, the money-lender rich. At last, when he hadn't a farthing left, the farmer went to the money-lender's house, and said, 'You can't squeeze water from a stone, and as you have nothing to get by me now, you might tell me the secret of becoming rich.'
Now this true story shows that a farmer once got the better of a money-lender; but only by losing one of his eyes!
@ LiveWellSimply:
Almost. They claim, though, that you get essentially all the benefit for the first child. A second child is a step back (although still ahead of a childess couple).
As I mention above, the whole analysis depends on the relationship between dollars spent and cost of living being pretty much the same for a child as for an adult. I don't know if that's true. Guest doesn't seem to think so.
They're not looking at changes to the need for spending at all--they're just claiming that there's more money per person to spend: The child is living better (in the sense that more dollars per year are being spent on him or her) than a single person grossing $10,000 a year--even a bit better than a couple grossing $20,000 a year.
Perhaps it would be illegal, immoral, or even impossible to raise a child on that amount of money. I don't have any kids, so I simply don't have the data to express an opinion. I'm just reporting on what the book said.
From wikipedia, "worldwide CDS market at $58 trillion"... US is around $17 trillion instead of the reported $45 trillion in your response.
Wilson commented that Amazon often "prepares to ship" immediately.
In that case how can you get back to "your account" quickly enough to cancel the order?
The last thing I want is to be stuck with a book on biology and be out of pocket to the tune of $100.
Even though you say you can refuse delivery from UPS I'd still be down by $100 until Amazon passes the credit which could be one or two weeks later.
I've also never been a Prime Member or used a Prime trial so I'm a bit wary on the one hand but want the 3-mth free shipping on the other!
Any thoughts about this?
I'm also a bit puzzled Carrie.
If you refused the diaper package why did you have to contact UPS at all? Didn't the UPS person take it back straight away?
Also why the need to spend $100? Why not $50 or $30?
Income money declining, lack of jobs, lack of sales, with less work around more people will be in this situation soon. So many will be in trouble and it is not from signing into a mortage they could not afford. It is our economy that will make it so you will not be able to meet your mortgage or RENT obligations.
Is this really much different than those who took advantage of the U.S. bankruptcy system before its reform? I can't tell you how many times I've heard that people would buy whatever they wanted (whether they could afford it or not) and just file bankruptcy later. Who ended up paying for their spending? The rest of us. But that doesn't mean I'll ever just stop paying my bills.
Karma, good stewardship, whatever you want to call it, being shortsighted on this won't do you any good in the long run. Keep your head up, run a fair race, and you will be rewarded. Maybe not in interest rates or cash, but in knowing that you paid your debt and kept your honor and credit in tact. These things will all shake out in the end. We have to believe this, or our country is a sad place, indeed. (Besides, what are we teaching our kids if we just roll over and give it up?)
Good discussion, Paul!
Linsey
You guys in the States are so lucky to have all these coupons and coupon websites. Here in New Zealand, we just don't get as much of that going on. Ah well, I'll save money in other ways :-)
The article is spot on except for the part about the guy who lost his job. When you commit to a mortgage you should know there will be bumps along the 30 year road. Government has no business helping you. That's what friends and family are for! House prices going up or down shouldn't stop you from making payments - you made an agreement - follow through! Stop the effin bailout bs!
meant to say either a Revolution or a Civil War. Either one will be painful.
Screw the 'struggling' homeowners. Bail out your own sorry asses. I don't want to pay for your mistakes, miscalculations or even your SUV's.
Predatory lending, yes, there was that, but what happened to filling out documents honestly and reading what you sign?
What's happening today will lead to a new American Revolution. Or, maybe a new American Revolution, one that will shatter this nation. There are no modern Abraham Lincolns around.
The coupon preview option sounds interesting. We've only got until the end of today, huh? I was just about to start dinner, but I think I'll jump on this first.
I haven't fully read the article yet, but I've bookmarked it :) I have a bag of dried lentils at home that I should really use, and I'm sure this article will help me figure something out.
"Sorry, I find most of these places are just an invitation to overeat mediocre, extremely unhealthy food just because it's "all you can eat!" "
For the most part, I agree with you. My SO is "not allowed" (his words) to go to Chinese buffets anymore because he overeats and feels sick afterwards.
That said, there's an Indian restaurant near me that serves proper sit-down dinners and a lunch buffet. I mean, there's still a chance of overeating, but it is good food, and somewhat healthier than the Americanized Chinese food you get at most buffets (oh, and much friendlier to vegetarians!). Also the only time I ever go is with my coworkers, and we walk the two and a half miles there and back, so it works out ;)
So they're claiming that it costs LESS than $1693/year (about $141.00/month) out of pocket (the difference in the income figures) to raise a child? On what planet is that the case?
food, clothing, healthcare, childcare, higher insurance premiums-- ALL of it for under $141 a month?!?!?
I might help to have a coupon strategy to save yourself the most cash. If you choose say a half hour every friday clipping coupons, depending on you grocery bill, could save maybe 40 percent. I even overheard once from the "Coupon Mom", that you could do good by buying 2 or 3 newspapers. Now I've heard some whoppers, but I'll let everyone else be the judge.
Coupon Links
Another GOOD coupon link
I would encourage anyone, before they make any rash decisions, to become more informed about their options. First, read all your can about the current bill (from the dot govs themslves). Second, don't forget about the HopeNow program, and other like it, that help struggling homeowners.
RefiWerks
HopeNow
FHA Foreclosure Help
@ Philip Brewer:
This reminds me of the book Cheaper by the Dozen. The more children you have, the lower the CPC (cost per child) is, since they all live in the same house, share the same resources etc. :-)
Loved the article. A lot of people are thinking this way. I too have a good fixed rate on a 30 year loan from when I purchased a very modest home at the end of 2002. This idea sounds great on paper, but so does communism. The reality is the plan will be a lot harder to "live". I wish those who choose to do this a lot luck. Good luck sleeping at night and good luck with Uncle Sam taking care of you. It has been my experience when Uncle Sam takes care of you, it normally does not go so well and certainly not very smoothly...think red tape, long lines, being placed on hold and being screwed over. One way or another the more goverment in your life, the more headaches you will have. When has the government ever run anything well or smoothly? It is actually probably less stressful just to work hard and pay your bills. In the end, what goes around comes around. And if not, at least I can sleep at night. All the money in the world is no good if you cannot sleep at night and be at peace. So fellow payors of other other people's irresponsibility, I say....Sleep Well my friends, Sleep well!
I have Pennsylvania Ave. jus email me back...let me know if u want it or whatever i think i've become fed up with this game.....
Renting is often better when considering where to personally live, but this should not be taken to exclude real estate from a well diversified portfolio. There are different types of real estate bets to make, many of which are superior to a single family residence.
When it comes to deciding whether to rent or own for yourself I defer to these two articles written on the decision:
http://www.thefreedomfactory.us/why-renting-is-better/
http://www.thefreedomfactory.us/why-renting-is-better-part-2/
When considering real estate as an investment (not place to live), apply basic discounted cash flow valuation methodologies and make sure risk-adjusted expected returns are greater than required returns for the risk level of the asset class...for real estate ~ 14% before tax RROR. Since real estate markets are illiquid and very much imefficient, there are many chances to negotiate deals that meet required return hurdle rates.
We did the responsible thing too. We put down 20% on a modest home and got a fixed rate, 30-year mortgage. It ticks me off to no end that the speculators, real estate flippers, and the instant gratification, no-money-down crowd are getting bailed out. Sure, there's blame enough to go around to include the dishonest people who wrote out these irresponsible loans, but as you say, no one put a gun to anyone's head and made them take out a loan they couldn't afford.
It makes me sick. I'm going to keep paying my mortgage, along with the extra principle payments. Sure, it'd be nice to not have to pay off the rest of the mortgage, but we got where we are by doing the responsible, cautious, plodding thing. I'd rather *know* I paid off our debt fair and square, so that no one can touch us, than gamble on getting something for nothing.
I haven't done the calculations myself; I'm just reporting on what Kotlikoff and Burns had to say. They describe a poor couple, each making $10,000 a year, living in New Bedford, Massachusetts. (They quote the Lizzie Borden poem.) Here's what they have to say:
There is no possible way you can save money by having children. They will ALWAYS be more expensive than any tax breaks you may receive. Have you looked at health care coverage lately? My state requires 3 vaccinations this year for my 18 month old child, and insurance covers ONE. I end up paying $185 each for the other two completely out of my pocket.
That's one tiny example, but you get my drift. It will never be a financial benefit to have children.
Aside from that, shouldn't there be other reasons for having children other than to save a buck or two? What happens when you realize you are losing money on the child?
Sears has a pretty good return policy, so I wouldn't exactly call it tossing dollar bills out the window-- though I do find their quality to be low on many things.
They have a correspondingly good mens' sale.
Great tip on the LNT sale, I've been wanting to get a second set of my favorite sheets from there and waiting for the price to drop.
This is an old story that sums up the only option that we have to help our children. Of course it involves our own personal sacrifice.
Call the farmer John Galt.
HERE was once a farmer who suffered much at the hands of a money-lender. Good harvests, or bad, the farmer was always poor, the money-lender rich. At last, when he hadn't a farthing left, the farmer went to the money-lender's house, and said, 'You can't squeeze water from a stone, and as you have nothing to get by me now, you might tell me the secret of becoming rich.'
Now this true story shows that a farmer once got the better of a money-lender; but only by losing one of his eyes!
http://www.digital.library.upenn.edu/women/steel/punjab/punjab-26.html